PDA

View Full Version : I've lost value by spinning chests all this time retroactively? :(



KingGabriel
06-18-2015, 11:04 AM
Set 1/2/3 chests now occasionally produce stardust on spin? Is this going to be backdated or are we going to be getting retroactive changes to chests a lot in the future? Should I just sit on my chests until the last second?

Stardust can be listed on the AH, so it has value. I've span over 1000 common chests so it's not by a small amount I've missed out on potential stardust if this isn't being granted retroactively.

Stok3d
06-18-2015, 11:13 AM
Easy fix would be to only allow dust to spawn on set 3 chests and beyond... if it makes you feel any better, I'm likely approaching 10mil on gold spent already rolling...

kaiizza
06-18-2015, 11:32 AM
I shouldn't matter at all, game is still changing and you take your chances doing things early. I see no reason to do any retro granting of dust.

israel.kendall
06-18-2015, 11:33 AM
Now that stardust is coming off chest spins, I feel like I've made a very bad mistake....(someone cheer me up)

http://i.imgur.com/eWyairU.png

Thrawn
06-18-2015, 11:34 AM
Now that stardust is coming off chest spins, I feel like I've made a very bad mistake....(someone cheer me up)

Indeed, I really regret rolling all my common chests now. :(

KingGabriel
06-18-2015, 11:35 AM
http://www.thatcutesite.com/uploads/2010/12/soapy_hedgehog_bath.jpg

Fyren
06-18-2015, 11:37 AM
Easy fix would be to only allow dust to spawn on set 3 chests and beyond... if it makes you feel any better, I'm likely approaching 10mil on gold spent already rolling...

I think this makes sense, frankly. I'd be in full support of this solution. I mean, I'm definitely biased for having spun 200+. Gamble that I realize it might have been, I don't really want to feel effectively punished for having done so.

havocattack
06-18-2015, 11:38 AM
Maybe they will back date us xD

KingGabriel
06-18-2015, 11:38 AM
I shouldn't matter at all, game is still changing and you take your chances doing things early. I see no reason to do any retro granting of dust.
Those who have invested more, and most likely bought a lot of plat to buy gold with, have lost a lot more. That does not seem a fair reward system.

israel.kendall
06-18-2015, 11:39 AM
Maybe they will back date us xD

Something like that would certainly cheer me up.

Zophie
06-18-2015, 11:41 AM
Maybe they will back date us xD

Yeah, I don't really wanna ask for handouts but it'd be nice if maybe we got some kind of one time bonus stardust gifts in our mailboxes based on how many chests we've already spun ;)

havocattack
06-18-2015, 11:42 AM
Even if it was just 50% of what we would have got if we waited, that would be nice

Bombs
06-18-2015, 11:44 AM
I've spun a few million gold on chests. I've always understood that there could be something that I would be missing out on by spinning early. It was always an "at your own risk" sort of thing. I think they should leave the system as it is implemented in the test server. It doesn't make sense to remove a reward from the first two sets because some people already spun those chests.

Svenn
06-18-2015, 11:44 AM
It's a random chance like everything else, right? In that case they owe us nothing. You got your rewards for what you spun already. Giving more would be double dipping. I'm still happy with my 700+ chests spun.

Patrigan
06-18-2015, 11:46 AM
Where's this info coming from?

That said, are we sure this will affect chests from the first two sets? Feels to me that they can just activate this starting set 3.

israel.kendall
06-18-2015, 11:47 AM
It's a random chance like everything else, right? In that case they owe us nothing. You got your rewards for what you spun already. Giving more would be double dipping. I'm still happy with my 700+ chests spun.

Do you think they will post a notice when it's safe to spin more chests, or will it never be?

KingGabriel
06-18-2015, 11:49 AM
Do you think they will post a notice when it's safe to spin more chests, or will it never be?
Sit on my stack of chests until the end of time, got it. >.>


Where's this info coming from?

That said, are we sure this will affect chests from the first two sets? Feels to me that they can just activate this starting set 3.

Test server, try it yourself.

TOOT
06-18-2015, 11:50 AM
I'm with Svenn on this one. Getting stardust now probably replaces some chance of previous rewards.

As an example. If you were say 10% to get a AA Windborne Acolyte from rolling a chest, that may have been changed to say 8% with a 2% chance to get stardust as a reward. It will probably just make the previous rewards we have rolled on that much rarer with an influx of Stardust as a replacement to the chances of the other stuff going down.

Svenn
06-18-2015, 11:52 AM
Do you think they will post a notice when it's safe to spin more chests, or will it never be?

It's always safe to spin. You either want the rewards or you don't. Spinning before may have meant not getting stardust but you got the same amount of rewards. You either won something or you didn't.

KingGabriel
06-18-2015, 11:52 AM
I'm with Svenn on this one. Getting stardust now probably replaces some chance of previous rewards.

As an example. If you were say 10% to get a AA Windborne Acolyte from rolling a chest, that may have been changed to say 8% with a 2% chance to get stardust as a reward. It will probably just make the previous rewards we have rolled on that much rarer with an influx of Stardust as a replacement to the chances of the other stuff going down.
That's not how it works, try it yourself, it corresponds to roll colours.

Patrigan
06-18-2015, 11:52 AM
server, try it yourself.

Realized this now, yeah. Felt stupid :p

I'm actually happy that I didn't get the stardust. Consider this: they don't want chests to start giving MORE prizes, just new prizes. So in order to give stardust, chances of getting the other prizes have probably been lowered.

havocattack
06-18-2015, 11:53 AM
Basically they have added stardusts in as ADDITIONAL rewards to some spins now, for example I just got 3 gold spiders and got the usual 5k gold, legendary, rare ... but also got legendary stardust

Is kind of a big deal :o

KingGabriel
06-18-2015, 11:55 AM
Realized this now, yeah. Felt stupid :p

I'm actually happy that I didn't get the stardust. Consider this: they don't want chests to start giving MORE prizes, just new prizes. So in order to give stardust, chances of getting the other prizes have probably been lowered.
You're making up a reason to rectify where neither of us has the information (?), this should signal to you that there's something wrong.

TOOT
06-18-2015, 11:55 AM
That's not how it works, try it yourself, it corresponds to roll colours.

Yea I see now. You're right.

Svenn
06-18-2015, 11:55 AM
In that case, I could see them giving out some bonus stardust when this goes live for those of us who spun a bunch. We'll have to wait and see what they have planned.

Xexist
06-18-2015, 11:57 AM
In that case, I could see them giving out some bonus stardust when this goes live for those of us who spun a bunch. We'll have to wait and see what they have planned.

As you said, they owe us nothing - But it would sure be nice.

Zophie
06-18-2015, 12:01 PM
It really boils down to what HXE's intentions are with adding the Stardust rewards. If they felt that the current cost of spinning chests wasn't adequate for the rewards given and they added Stardust as an additional reward to beef up the prizes then yeah I hope they give us some retro-dust. :) If however they lowered the percent chance to achieve winning spin results to compensate for the additional stardust rewards and keep the prize payouts generally the same as before, then I wouldn't expect anything extra.

KingGabriel
06-18-2015, 12:04 PM
Either way, I'd like a response.

Aradon
06-18-2015, 12:04 PM
On the one hand, I'm sympathetic to the losses, but on the other, we can't afford to retroactively award all lost opportunities across the lifespan of the game. Years down the line, new players might say, "I spent $100 on packs with EV of 150 plat, but early players could spend money on packs that had an EV of 180 plat!" Or the reverse, "I spent $100 on packs back in the day for low-EV packs, and now the EV is much higher!" etc.

When the value of something changes, your current collection will change in value as a result, and we can't really stabilize that. I think a lot of people would argue we shouldn't even if we could.

Patrigan
06-18-2015, 12:09 PM
That's not how it works, try it yourself, it corresponds to roll colours.

You do realize that internally those colours probably mean nothing, right? When you spin chests, take a note of all the failed rolls. You will quickly see that there are some combinations that you never see and others that you see all the time.

Internally, all possible results is probably just one long weighted list. When you press roll, it randomly decides one outcome and shows you (with a fancy animation) the result. So when they added the new colours and added the stardust, they probably redistributed all the weights.

That said, chances are that they still increased the percentage of wins, since it's much more fun to actually win stuff.

KingGabriel
06-18-2015, 12:10 PM
On the one hand, I'm sympathetic to the losses, but on the other, we can't afford to retroactively award all lost opportunities across the lifespan of the game.
We can't afford to retroactively change chest spin loot tables, either >.>

Sparrow
06-18-2015, 12:11 PM
I hope they don't retro dust. This game will be evolving forever and I guarantee this is not the only change they'll be making to chest spins in the future. It just doesn't make sense to give hand-outs whenever someone misses the boat (or gets on the wrong boat, or leaves on a boat too early, etc./whatever -- don't want to get into an argument about the cliché metaphor I used).

KingGabriel
06-18-2015, 12:12 PM
@Patrigan As I said earlier, you can't just assume that's the case.
@Sparrow If you want a terrible metaphor, the boat has changed into a giant rubber ducky. It did not state this would happen on my ticket.

Fyren
06-18-2015, 12:13 PM
On the one hand, I'm sympathetic to the losses, but on the other, we can't afford to retroactively award all lost opportunities across the lifespan of the game. Years down the line, new players might say, "I spent $100 on packs with EV of 150 plat, but early players could spend money on packs that had an EV of 180 plat!" Or the reverse, "I spent $100 on packs back in the day for low-EV packs, and now the EV is much higher!" etc.

When the value of something changes, your current collection will change in value as a result, and we can't really stabilize that. I think a lot of people would argue we shouldn't even if we could.

Indeed, we shouldn't. We will have enough value variance; So there's no reason to introduce more. Simply not adding the stardust to set 1 and 2 chests would accomplish this just fine.

Superjuice
06-18-2015, 12:14 PM
As long as only set 3 chests and on reward dust I am ok with it, if set 1 and set 2 chests start rewarding dust I may riot ;)

KingGabriel
06-18-2015, 12:15 PM
As long as only set 3 chests and on reward dust I am ok with it, if set 1 and set 2 chests start rewarding dust I may riot ;)

Read up. They do, check the test server.

KingGabriel
06-18-2015, 12:16 PM
Indeed, we shouldn't. We will have enough value variance; So there's no reason to introduce more. Simply not adding the stardust to set 1 and 2 chests would accomplish this just fine.
That's not the case on the test server at the moment, that solution is also acceptable to me.

Superjuice
06-18-2015, 12:16 PM
I'm at work, no checking the test server for me. That's why we have you.

In that case I'll take a rollback on my chests and my millions in gold back ;(

Patrigan
06-18-2015, 12:16 PM
@Patrigan As I said earlier, you can't just assume that's the case.

Like I suggested, take note of the failures you have. You'll see the same ones come up time and time again, while I have yet to see many potential combinations. This is because it most likely does not spin each spinner separately, but, as I explained, one long weighted list. It's also a better implementation, because it gives them easier control over the amount of prizes handed out. Now, they could potentially obfuscate this more, by adding more failure combinations.

I'm not saying that it really works that way, but to me the signs do point at it.

ossuary
06-18-2015, 12:17 PM
All chests can reward stardust on spinning. It's not based on the chest, but on the roll results on the Wheels of Fate.

And I have probably spun more chests than all but maybe a couple of dozen other users, so... grr. :p

KingGabriel
06-18-2015, 12:19 PM
I can assume this based on the information we have. I can't, however, state it as fact.

That said, like I suggested, take note of the failures you have. You'll see the same ones come up time and time again. This is because it most likely does not spin each spinner separately.

However, discussing this is a pretty moot point.

I was responding to "So when they added the new colours and added the stardust, they probably redistributed all the weights."

nicosharp
06-18-2015, 12:23 PM
Maybe they will back date us xD
DataDragon would have an Aneurysm trying to back-fill this data, if they have it...

Superjuice
06-18-2015, 12:24 PM
It can't be that hard to back pay all that dust for previous chest spins... right? right guys??? *sobs*

KingGabriel
06-18-2015, 12:27 PM
DataDragon would have an Aneurysm trying to back-fill this data, if they have it...
Look at the span chests, calculate the chances, apply the chances, dust.

Xexist
06-18-2015, 12:27 PM
I hope they don't retro dust. This game will be evolving forever and I guarantee this is not the only change they'll be making to chest spins in the future. It just doesn't make sense to give hand-outs whenever someone misses the boat (or gets on the wrong boat, or leaves on a boat too early, etc./whatever -- don't want to get into an argument about the cliché metaphor I used).

Disagreed. We havent been able to open chests so really the only thing we COULD do with them was spin them, there was nothing else to spend gold on either. Yes people COULD have waited but noone could really be expected to have done so

KingGabriel
06-18-2015, 12:28 PM
Disagreed. We havent been able to open chests so really the only thing we COULD do with them was spin them, there was nothing else to spend gold on either. Yes people COULD have waited but noone could really be expected to have done so
At one point it was the ONLY gold sink in the game.

Armies
06-18-2015, 12:29 PM
ya it would be different if dust was inside the chests but the fact that you can get some from spinning makes all the chests I have spun the gold used much less valuable

Xexist
06-18-2015, 12:30 PM
there was nothing else to spend gold on either.


At one point it was the ONLY gold sink in the game.

I... agree with you.

KingGabriel
06-18-2015, 12:33 PM
I... agree with you.
I'm aware :P Was capitalizing for emphasis, not disagreement.

Zophie
06-18-2015, 12:35 PM
Yeah, considering we sunk all our early gold into these chests and simultaneously helped increase the value of gold for F2P players and made the game economy healthier due to our early spins, it might be nice to get some kind of retro dust as a thank you, if HXE is willing ;)

Sparrow
06-18-2015, 12:36 PM
Disagreed. We havent been able to open chests so really the only thing we COULD do with them was spin them, there was nothing else to spend gold on either. Yes people COULD have waited but noone could really be expected to have done so
Well, however you want to justify it to yourself, it doesn't really matter. I hope they don't, you hope they do.... shrug... end of story.

Fyren
06-18-2015, 12:38 PM
That's the case on the test server at the moment, that solution is also acceptable to me.

Except I just spun a bunch and it's not the case on the test server. Set 1 and 2 chests both have been generating Stardust on gold results.

KingGabriel
06-18-2015, 12:40 PM
Well, however you want to justify it to yourself, it doesn't really matter. I hope they don't, you hope they do.... shrug... end of story.
You don't decide when this thread ends :p

KingGabriel
06-18-2015, 12:42 PM
Typo'd, woops.

israel.kendall
06-18-2015, 12:46 PM
HEX (I call them HEX because I'm dyslexic) has always seemed to want us making well informed choices in regards to these chests. This is their reason behind not allowing us to even trade them until we know what is inside. To me, this is what makes it not feel right. This feeling of missing out that some of us have right now, is exactly what HEX has been trying to avoid all this time.

KingGabriel
06-18-2015, 12:47 PM
HEX (I call them HEX because I'm dyslexic) has always seemed to want us making well informed choices in regards to these chests. This is their reason behind not allowing us to even trade them until we know what is inside. To me, this is what makes it not feel right. This feeling of missing out that some of us have right now, is exactly what HEX has been trying to avoid all this time.
Yes, they specifically said chests wouldn't be able to be sold before they were openable (and we knew their value!) for example.

Fyren
06-18-2015, 12:57 PM
Well, I just spun about 50 chests on the test server and did some math. Based on a sample of 75 chests spun in their entirety, I got 12 Common dusts, 7 Uncommon, and 1 Rare. I spun them to the finish.

From that admittedly extremely rough chunk of data, multiplying the probability by the base value of the dust yields 400 gold lost per spin.

Taking into consideration that you probably didn't spin your rares and thus you may have spun some of the rares with still have pay-spins on them, multiply your no-spin chests by 400 and that is a conservative (if possibly wildly inaccurate without a bigger sample) estimate of how much gold you lost in Stardust should this change be implemented on the server as is, if there has been no tinkering with the chest reward probabilities.

In my case that number is 146000. And I know I'm not on the high end.

EDIT: Spun a few more to total 75, updated the sample, previous value of 396g/chest revised to 400 on the dot

kaiizza
06-18-2015, 01:02 PM
the greed here is just awful. You haven't lost anything. From this point on you have the ability to gain something extra. I mean dang man, be happy about the good stuff and stop making up bad stuff to bitch about.

KingGabriel
06-18-2015, 01:03 PM
the greed here is just awful. You haven't lost anything. From this point on you have the ability to gain something extra. I mean dang man, be happy about the good stuff and stop making up bad stuff to bitch about.
This is possibly the first complaint I've had against HexENT this year. :P

Xexist
06-18-2015, 01:04 PM
Well, however you want to justify it to yourself, it doesn't really matter. I hope they don't, you hope they do.... shrug... end of story.

I dont have to justify anything to myself. Thanks for coming out.

Sparrow
06-18-2015, 01:06 PM
You don't decide when this thread ends :p
If only... :D

Fyren
06-18-2015, 01:32 PM
By my rough estimate from adding up the stardust recieved after spinning 75 chests to completion on the test server (getting 12 common, 7 uncommon and 1 rare) this basically equates to 400g lost per chest you've spun prior to the Set 3 launch. If my numbers are representative, that adds up - in my case to 146000; in Gabriel's case he's lost an effective 800,000g for the 2000 chests he's spun.

Neither of those are tiny numbers.

szimek
06-18-2015, 01:50 PM
I think best idea would be getting dust from spinning only set 3 chests and above ;]

spankydonkey
06-18-2015, 01:51 PM
So it looks like they have added dust to the gold wins, on all chests, not just the new set 3.
1 gold icon = 500 gold + common dust,
2 gold icons = 2500 gold + uncommon dust
3 gold icons = 5000 gold + rare or legendary dust

Gold wins where always underwhelming, so its good that they have boosted it.
Am I disappointed that I have spun best part of 1000 chests, before this was implemented?
Yes, but what are you going to do?
Hindsight is a most wonderful thing

Fyren
06-18-2015, 02:03 PM
Am I disappointed that I have spun best part of 1000 chests, before this was implemented?
Yes, but what are you going to do?

What you can do is request a little acknowledgement and explanation behind the decision; what the intent and reasoning was, whether they intend to offer anything to people who've spun chests already. It's not like we're doing a rain dance here and hoping the chaos of the universe itself sorts things out in our favor; we're asking a bunch of people "What's up, did you really intend this, and why?"

Xenavire
06-18-2015, 02:04 PM
I think best idea would be getting dust from spinning only set 3 chests and above ;]

But that punishes the new player who comes in, buys some set 1+2 packs and cracks them, then decides to roll those chests. They aren't going to understand the difference between the sets unless someone clearly explains it to them, and once they do know, it discourages them from opening packs from the first block.

All you idea does is favour those of us whom have been here for months (going on years for some of us). And we hear often enough that the game has too much going on before it officially launches, having a bunch of unintuitive design choices like that will just turn new players off.

I say this change is great. I say it also doesn't matter whether or not we get 'compensated' because we knew what the risks and benefits were under that system. So what if the system has been updated? Lots of MMO's or TCG's have had much larger changes that people were never refunded for, and this is really fairly minor in the grand scheme of things. I am just happy that any unrolled set 1/2 chests I have can drop dust, which actually gives me a reason to consider spending gold on them again... Something I was doubting would ever happen.

KingGabriel
06-18-2015, 02:05 PM
What you can do is request a little acknowledgement and explanation behind the decision; what the intent and reasoning was, whether they intend to offer anything to people who've spun chests already. It's not like we're doing a rain dance here and hoping the chaos of the universe itself sorts things out in our favor; we're asking a bunch of people "What's up, did you really intend this, and why?"
Yes.... that... *puts umbrella down*

@Xenavire
A: It's a different loot table
B: As someone said above, about 800k gold in my case. A truely shocking amount in Stoked's case, probably.

Bombs
06-18-2015, 02:08 PM
KG, you have lost nothing. Nothing has been removed from your account. You made decisions. It is as simple as that.

Xenavire
06-18-2015, 02:10 PM
Yes.... that... *puts umbrella down*

@Xenavire
A: It's a different loot table
B: As someone said above, about 800k gold in my case. A truely shocking amount in Stoked's case, probably.

A: I don't get why this matters. They added something that we benefit from going forwards, but that doesn't change the fact we knew what the risks were at the time we made the decision to roll.
B: And...? I repeat, this is something we couldn't have known, and for that reason didn't factor into our decision making. Yet we still made those decisions. Just because something changes doesn't mean we get to undo our choices. If I cast a murder on a VK, I can't take it back and target an Angel instead a turn later. We live with our choices.

DataDragon
06-18-2015, 02:11 PM
We are discussing options internally.
More information will be shared once we have something official.

Pheelon
06-18-2015, 02:12 PM
KG, you have lost nothing. Nothing has been removed from your account. You made decisions. It is as simple as that.

We lost nothing - true - BUT others will gain from not using the only gold sink availible at the time. + afaik if i remeber correctly DataDragon (or was it Chark?) said sometime ago that they have logs of every chest spun so far --> such a retro fix wouldn't be that hard in this case either (if stardust stays for Set 1/2 chests)

Barkam
06-18-2015, 02:15 PM
We are discussing options internally.
More information will be shared once we have something official.

Yay! Looking forward to it!

szimek
06-18-2015, 02:16 PM
@Xenavire i see your point, but in the future there will be probably more things added to the spins and the problem will rise again. So if new rewards would be added with, lets say set 8, they could be added to the spins from set 8+ chests. It's not perfect solution but imo it won't make us feel bad about spinning chests before rewards were added :P

Tazelbain
06-18-2015, 02:16 PM
Yep, I have lots of WoF spins because "why not I am not using the gold for anything". Huge mistake. Hoard everything unless you absolutely have a good reason to part with it.

hex_colin
06-18-2015, 02:19 PM
We are discussing options internally.
More information will be shared once we have something official.

I probably have the most to lose, but I'm in the camp that thinks backdating any additional rewards sets an awful precedent. :( You play the game, you take your chances. Every Set/content release changes the value of everything anyway, this is no different. Everything evolves...

Tazelbain
06-18-2015, 02:20 PM
@Xenavire i see your point, but in the future there will be probably more things added to the spins and the problem will rise again. So if new rewards would be added with, lets say set 8, they could be added to the spins from set 8+ chests. It's not perfect solution but imo it won't make us feel bad about spinning chests before rewards were added :P I don't want stop adding cool things to WoF to spare my feelings.

Fyren
06-18-2015, 02:21 PM
We are discussing options internally.
More information will be shared once we have something official.

Good enough for me.

KingGabriel
06-18-2015, 02:26 PM
We are discussing options internally.
More information will be shared once we have something official.
Thanks :)

szimek
06-18-2015, 02:33 PM
I don't want stop adding cool things to WoF to spare my feelings.

:D

true, but i'm not saying they should stop adding stuff, just add them to the set they came with and further.

either way i'm okay with adding dust to only set 3+ or to all sets. As Colin said: "You play the game, you take your chances." but there will be people that will feel salty about not hoarding chests. But on the other hand, those who hoarded chests will feel the same way if rewards would be added only to Set X+ :P

For me the idea for Set X+ makes it more... "cleaner" and won't make difference between those who hoarded and those who didn't

TOOT
06-18-2015, 02:36 PM
This is the only thing I can think of that would "hurt" early adapters. We've all benefited from countless things that newer players won't experience. Gold from tournaments, (which probably offset any "old" rolling of chests) as well as the temporary bug awarding way more legendary chests than they should have.

Anytime they want to add something new and beneficial to the game overall, do they need to worry about what people did in the past and compensate for it? This sets a bad precedent as Colin said.

That being said, they will probably compensate in some form, but I truly think it's unnecessary this time around.

Sparrow
06-18-2015, 02:38 PM
I've spun all my chests. Millions of gold worth of spins.

Off the top of my head, the only conditions under which I would have a potentially compensatable complaint is if they A) Removed chests from the game B) if they drastically lowered the cost per spin or C) Hex made a statement that they planned on reducing the value of chest contents lower than their original estimates.

In this case they added an unplanned (afaik) feature to the game. I most definitely WANT Hex to add all kinds of unplanned features in the future. It's a great thing. What I don't want is Hex to become reticent about making changes because there will always be a subset of the community they'll have to pay off to keep them happy.

A lot of things in life are unfair; adding dust to the Wheel of Fate is not one of them.

ossuary
06-18-2015, 02:39 PM
I don't think they should provide retroactive compensation for past spins (even though it would definitely be in my favor if they did, considering how many spins I've done), but I do wish they would adjust the gold drop rates going forward to be based on chest rarity instead of flat. Wins should never feel like losses, that does NOT encourage the behavior they are shooting for (an enticing gold sink).

Xexist
06-18-2015, 02:44 PM
I probably have the most to lose, but I'm in the camp that thinks backdating any additional rewards sets an awful precedent. :( You play the game, you take your chances. Every Set/content release changes the value of everything anyway, this is no different. Everything evolves...

I dont really care which way they go on this, I agree backdating sets a bad precedent, on the other hand I dont want to see a decision made that encourages people to hoard and not spend their gold / plat / dust / whatever. If people spend whatever they make quickly, without having to worry about 'missing out' on future additions, isnt that better for economy? (I could be reading into the impact way too much, granted)

Zophie
06-18-2015, 02:45 PM
... but I do wish they would adjust the gold drop rates going forward to be based on chest rarity instead of flat. Wins should never feel like losses, that does NOT encourage the behavior they are shooting for (an enticing gold sink).

That's a good point, I wonder if that's why the dusts were added, since from what I've heard you get different rarity dusts from different rarity chests (haven't done this myself yet, just what I've heard), which would be worth more gold for higher rarities.

Xexist
06-18-2015, 02:46 PM
I don't think they should provide retroactive compensation for past spins (even though it would definitely be in my favor if they did, considering how many spins I've done), but I do wish they would adjust the gold drop rates going forward to be based on chest rarity instead of flat. Wins should never feel like losses, that does NOT encourage the behavior they are shooting for (an enticing gold sink).

yeah i can get behind that statement as well

nicosharp
06-18-2015, 02:47 PM
That's a good point, I wonder if that's why the dusts were added, since from what I've heard you get different rarity dusts from different rarity chests (haven't done this myself yet, just what I've heard), which would be worth more gold for higher rarities.
While it would be nice, I think the rewards will be whats actually in the chests based on the chests rarity. The spins are just bonuses, not always feel good "wins".
I don't care what they do, just as long as they keep making an awesome game. We are lucky to get in on the ground floor, and I'd hate to trivialize that experience (especially given all the gold we got through tournaments in early beta) by asking for more hand-outs.

KingGabriel
06-18-2015, 02:49 PM
That's a good point, I wonder if that's why the dusts were added, since from what I've heard you get different rarity dusts from different rarity chests (haven't done this myself yet, just what I've heard), which would be worth more gold for higher rarities.
No it's based on the colours you spin into.

Fyren
06-18-2015, 02:51 PM
I dont really care which way they go on this, I agree backdating sets a bad precedent, on the other hand I dont want to see a decision made that encourages people to hoard and not spend their gold / plat / dust / whatever. If people spend whatever they make quickly, without having to worry about 'missing out' on future additions, isnt that better for economy? (I could be reading into the impact way too much, granted)

Well, on my estimate after spinning 75 chests on test, the gold value added to chest spinning by the addition of stardust was about 400 a chest. So if the average return on investment suddenly increased by 33% of the entry fee... I mean, would that possibility make you gun shy on using the gold sink in case that happened again?

Dovetails into Oss' point, though. The stardust change added huge relative value to the chests that didn't desperately need value added to them and did little to add value to the chests that really don't seem worth it, mysterious contents aside.

Zophie
06-18-2015, 02:54 PM
No it's based on the colours you spin into.

Huh, Okay, I'm mostly just going off of someone else saying they got a legendary dust for spinning a legendary chest, and common dust for common chest, etc. Maybe it was just a coincidence or I misunderstood, oh well.

Thoom
06-18-2015, 03:01 PM
I now feel a bit bad about spinning so many chests, but I trust the Hex folk to do the right thing, whatever that happens to be.

I think stardust only dropping from rolls on set3+ chests is probably the fairest thing to do, but I would also be very happy with backdated rewards if they turned out to be feasible.

Deckofmanythings
06-18-2015, 03:01 PM
Fix 1, best case: Logs for already rolled chests are consulted and a script is written to give dust based on Gold-symbol results you have gotten prior to Set 3 release.

Fix 2, acceptable (to me): A script is written that looks at the number of spun chests you have then you get Dust based on the frequency of gold-symbol results vs. how many chests you spun.

Now, if you think you have "lost nothing" ask yourself this: on Live would you spin a chest NOW if you had the gold, or would you hold onto the gold now that you know you have a chance at getting dust when set 3 is released?

Marsden
06-18-2015, 03:05 PM
I probably have the most to lose, but I'm in the camp that thinks backdating any additional rewards sets an awful precedent. :( You play the game, you take your chances. Every Set/content release changes the value of everything anyway, this is no different. Everything evolves...

I think to me the difference is that chests can't be opened yet. Once we can open chests, no back-dating because they're feature complete and new stuff is extra but right now, if at full Chest go-live there is Stardust on spins - we should get some retroactive consideration for spins.

Tazelbain
06-18-2015, 03:09 PM
How does denying cookies to future kids make up cookies you didn't receive as a kid?

Fyren
06-18-2015, 03:21 PM
I now feel a bit bad about spinning so many chests, but I trust the Hex folk to do the right thing, whatever that happens to be.

I think stardust only dropping from rolls on set3+ chests is probably the fairest thing to do, but I would also be very happy with backdated rewards if they turned out to be feasible.

I'm with this sentiment. I trust that Hex will do what their data has shown to be the best course as best they can. At the same time, I have to acknowledge a slightly icky feeling about the missed opportunity as part of their data and the discussion. If they decide, ultimately, that giving the early spinners nothing is the right course in light of everything else, that's fine; I'd simply like in that case to hear the reasoning they use to have a better gauge of their intent going forward so I don't stumble into what would ultimately become more 'traps' like this.



How does denying cookies to future kids make up cookies you didn't receive as a kid?

First, our community is better than this; you aren't going to earn any points or win any converts in a discussion by flippantly comparing those on a side having it to children - you'll just alienate them.

Second, leaving stardust out of Set 1 and 2 chests, which is what I assume you intended to refer to, is only one possible solution. It is a fair one, but not the only fair one. They have data on Wheel of Fate spins; they could easily generate stardust based on those spins, or just on the number of spun chests in the inventory.

With that possibility, I'll put it conversely, roughly paraphrasing Colin during the KS Draft Extension Kerfuffle: How does giving people cookies make yours less valid?

fido_one
06-18-2015, 03:22 PM
I agree that ultimately we don't deserve anything for prior spins, and that CZE's response of any kind regarding their thoughts are totally cool.

That being said, while I think retroing rewards is a bad idea, we are still, KS or not, pioneers in alpha and beta. I spent a lot of plat beyond my KS rewards to play tournaments back in the day more for the gold and the resulting chest spins under the impression that rolling for higher chests was going to be totally worth it when we could crack those suckers. CZE implied that the gold value of rolling chests was going to be worth the investment. The stardust is obviously a good part of that 'hey I won that, rolling a chest is a good use of gold for loot' value up to where they want it to be, so a retro reward may be warranted during this time period (a.k.a. before release / before chests are finalized).

Raith
06-18-2015, 03:28 PM
I have a ton of spun chests as well. I made decisions based on information available at the time whether it was worth it to me. Hex making changes to the wheel of fate was bound to happen, whether it be adding things, changing costs, % win results etc. And adding stardust to the WoF spins is a nice addition for everyone going forward. There will be plenty of other things change in the game but it's not worth stressing over. I don't really think compensation for past spins is necessary.

sukebe
06-18-2015, 03:30 PM
I've spun a few million gold on chests. I've always understood that there could be something that I would be missing out on by spinning early. It was always an "at your own risk" sort of thing. I think they should leave the system as it is implemented in the test server. It doesn't make sense to remove a reward from the first two sets because some people already spun those chests.

I too have spun thousands of chests and this is exactly how I feel. Leave things as they are in the test server. I spun chests early and was fully aware that things could change. Do I wish they had dust in the spin results from the beginning? sure I do but they didn't even exist when I spun the vast majority of my chests.

I don't see it as losing value on the chests I have already spun. It just means that every chest I spin in the future has now gained value, which makes me happy :-)

szimek
06-18-2015, 03:31 PM
How does denying cookies to future kids make up cookies you didn't receive as a kid?

It won't, but everybody should get the same amount of cookies for the same price when buying from the same bakery ;]

Falaris
06-18-2015, 03:31 PM
The best fix is just introduce stardust with set 3, simple as that. 'Best' comprises a fair solution AND the amount of time/manpower it would take to retroactively provide stardust to EVERYONE who rolled chests previously.

magic_gazz
06-18-2015, 03:31 PM
Oh good ANOTHER thing to make me regret rolling chests.

If they want to take some of the 40 odd AA windborns off my account and replace them with stardust that would be ok with me.

The reason this is bad is we were told what was on the loot table for those chests. They then added a desirable item too the loot tables after millions of gold had been spent.

Fyren
06-18-2015, 03:33 PM
It won't, but everybody should get the same amount of cookies for the same price when buying from the same bakery ;]

That is actually a substantially smarter and friendlier way of putting it than mine.

Zophie
06-18-2015, 03:33 PM
I agree that ultimately we don't deserve anything for prior spins, and that CZE's response of any kind regarding their thoughts are totally cool.

That being said, while I think retroing rewards is a bad idea, we are still, KS or not, pioneers in alpha and beta. I spent a lot of plat beyond my KS rewards to play tournaments back in the day more for the gold and the resulting chest spins under the impression that rolling for higher chests was going to be totally worth it when we could crack those suckers. CZE implied that the gold value of rolling chests was going to be worth the investment. The stardust is obviously a good part of that 'hey I won that, rolling a chest is a good use of gold for loot' value up to where they want it to be, so a retro reward may be warranted during this time period (a.k.a. before release / before chests are finalized).

I agree. I see what others are saying about "setting a precedent" but I think it's not quite that simple in this case - we're in a unique situation where up to this point all the chests are locked to our accounts, can't be opened, can't be traded, aren't final. Now that the reward structure is getting put at a level that HXE seems to be comfortable with, and finally letting us open them or trade them off, it seems like it might be nice to have a one-time catch up rewarded to those that already sunk all their gold into these before the changes were made. Down the road if they make more changes to the rewards it's not really going to be the same kind of ecosystem we're currently in up to this point, so any decision they make now I don't think would be setting any kind of precedent at all, in my opinion.

Anyway, I trust HXE to do whatever they feel is fair, and we don't have all the information or insight that they have regarding how this is being handled so I won't complain either way. I'm mostly just excited to see what's inside the chests :D

sukebe
06-18-2015, 03:36 PM
The best fix is just introduce stardust with set 3, simple as that. 'Best' comprises a fair solution AND the amount of time/manpower it would take to retroactively provide stardust to EVERYONE who rolled chests previously.

...or just release it as is and let all chest spins benefit from added value from here on out? seriously, what is with all of you and feeling that because you missed out (by spinning chests early) that everyone else has to as well? we were never promised that chest spin results would not be changed in the future. I have spun thousands of chests and i am still happy with this change as it gives added value to spinning chests from here on out.

hammer
06-18-2015, 03:38 PM
We get awesome content and on the brink of 1MMB patch and you guys want to moan about not getting something you never knew you were going to get. Big deal you ate your ice cream you enjoyed it but then they started adding sprinkles to the ice cream. Guess what your next Ice cream will come with sprinkles - wonderful joy. You know how ridiculous it would be to ask for sprinkles for all the historical ice cream you ate :?! Serious enjoy the test server and the 1MMB content :D

Falaris
06-18-2015, 03:38 PM
...or just release it as is and let all chest spins benefit from added value from here on out? seriously, what is with all of you and feeling that because you missed out (by spinning chests early) that everyone else has to as well? we were never promised that chest spin results would not be changed in the future. I have spun thousands of chests and i am still happy with this change as it gives added value to spinning chests from here on out.

Thank you for repeating this suggestion again. The 8th time was much more convincing.

Bombs
06-18-2015, 03:39 PM
How does denying cookies to future kids make up cookies you didn't receive as a kid?

Nailed it.

Zophie
06-18-2015, 03:40 PM
1MMB

1 million mega boners?

hammer
06-18-2015, 03:44 PM
1 million mega boners?

:D

sukebe
06-18-2015, 03:47 PM
It's a random chance like everything else, right? In that case they owe us nothing. You got your rewards for what you spun already. Giving more would be double dipping. I'm still happy with my 700+ chests spun.

Well said :-) we got our prizes already. all future spins will have even better results which makes me happy as I love spinning chests.

"Quote Originally Posted by Tazelbain View Post
How does denying cookies to future kids make up cookies you didn't receive as a kid?"

Lol, I love this. well said as well :-)

Tazelbain
06-18-2015, 03:48 PM
First, our community is better than this; you aren't going to earn any points or win any converts in a discussion by flippantly comparing those on a side having it to children - you'll just alienate them.
Don't be so dramatic. I have 300ish spun chests. I don't see the need to deny people stardust on their spins because didn't I get didn't get stardust on my spins. There is nothing to do but happy there are even more ways to stardust.

Fyren
06-18-2015, 03:57 PM
Don't be so dramatic. I have 300ish spun chests. I don't see the need to deny people stardust on their spins because didn't I get didn't get stardust on my spins. There is nothing to do but happy there are even more ways to stardust.

Decrying arguments as 'dramatic' isn't helpful either. C'mon, work with me here. Also read the other things in that post as potential options. Better than any of that, read what Szimek said, because he nailed it.

Rycajo
06-18-2015, 03:59 PM
If they want to take some of the 40 odd AA windborns off my account and replace them with stardust that would be ok with me.


Perhaps the Void Society will help you with that one day.

Salverus
06-18-2015, 04:00 PM
Sometimes you win some, sometimes you lose some.
In the beginning the plat:gold ratio was much higher and you would also get gold from tournaments, so it was much easier / cheaper to roll chests to begin with.
So basically if they would be given stardust for all chests rolled in the past, then that would put the current people at a disadvantage and then the discussion can go on forever.

Fyren
06-18-2015, 04:01 PM
...or just release it as is and let all chest spins benefit from added value from here on out? seriously, what is with all of you and feeling that because you missed out (by spinning chests early) that everyone else has to as well? we were never promised that chest spin results would not be changed in the future. I have spun thousands of chests and i am still happy with this change as it gives added value to spinning chests from here on out.

There's still a feeling of regret for that loss that we wish at least addressed if not compensated, and a concern over future changes so we have better decision making going forward. I don't think anything about that is unreasonable at all.

Yoss
06-18-2015, 04:03 PM
What you can do is request a little acknowledgement and explanation behind the decision; what the intent and reasoning was, whether they intend to offer anything to people who've spun chests already. It's not like we're doing a rain dance here and hoping the chaos of the universe itself sorts things out in our favor; we're asking a bunch of people "What's up, did you really intend this, and why?"

This. (And glad to hear from Orange that they're talking it over.) I have no complaints at this time. I will reserve judgment for after we get more details.

israel.kendall
06-18-2015, 04:04 PM
Do you guys remember back when there was talk about possibly putting gencon rewards into chests, but then they decided not to because they didn't want when you open them to matter. They didn't want to encourage chest hoarding to open at certain times.

What we have here is a similar situation, where when you pushed the spin button is a determining factor of the prizes received. If this is the way it will be going forward, it will encourage this unwanted chest hoarding situation we have been trying to avoid.

szimek
06-18-2015, 04:08 PM
I don't think i've naild it Gyren :P The most fairest of them all concept is just 1 way of looking at it. Tazelbain is also right, why deny someone cool stuff?

i'm ok, with whatever they'll decide BUT seeing how many people have problem with already spun chests i'm guessing that with the next addition, the topic will return, so the Set X+ idea is to avoid it.

Dust from set 1 and 2 is actually good for me, because i'll be buying them even when set 3 will roll in, to hunt for some missing cards :P

selpai
06-18-2015, 04:16 PM
This needs to not go live, at all. It's too problematic for the people who have spent gold rolling chests already. This CANNOT be a retroactive change to set 1 & 2 chests. This is something that can only be safely added to set 3 chests. This is completely unfair to anyone who has spent gold rolling chests.

Thoom
06-18-2015, 04:21 PM
Do you guys remember back when there was talk about possibly putting gencon rewards into chests, but then they decided not to because they didn't want when you open them to matter. They didn't want to encourage chest hoarding to open at certain times.

What we have here is a similar situation, where when you pushed the spin button is a determining factor of the prizes received. If this is the way it will be going forward, it will encourage this unwanted chest hoarding situation we have been trying to avoid.

This is the most important point, I think. If people think they'll be rewarded by not spending their resources because they will get more valuable in the future, the economy chokes.

Fyren
06-18-2015, 04:23 PM
Sometimes you win some, sometimes you lose some.
In the beginning the plat:gold ratio was much higher and you would also get gold from tournaments, so it was much easier / cheaper to roll chests to begin with.
So basically if they would be given stardust for all chests rolled in the past, then that would put the current people at a disadvantage and then the discussion can go on forever.

It'll be settled shortly enough when Datadragon and the team come to a decision. I don't think much I can say at this point is capable of influencing that decision; Hex is clearly aware of the issue and that acknowledgement is enough for the moment.

Understand that we're on a quest for information here; It feels as though people who spun all their stuff are being (EDIT: Or are possibly about to be, or are concerned about the possibility of being) punished for taking a risk on being early adopters by something that was the result of neither the RNG, nor a shifting marketplace, nor a shifting metagame. If you get shard screwed, that's RNG at work. If you buy a bunch of Reeses and then suddenly they tank in price in set 3 because he's scragged by a ubiquitous uncommon in Constructed, that's the market at work. This is HexENT about to make a deliberate decision.

As someone who loves optimizing resources and obtaining value - which is one of the very things that attracts me to this game over a nontradeable like Hearthstone - I'm not afraid to admit that the moment the concept of that missing out leaves me mildly sore. By my calculations, if the change goes live as-is, I"ve effectively missed $14.60 or so worth of gold (Gold-plat being back around 100:1 as of late) which is not an entirely insignificant number. If that is something that the Hex devs want and that we should always remain aware is a possibility, then that is useful information, and advises additional caution around offered gold sinks, or at least the Wheel. At the same time, if they wish to offer something to those who did, that is also useful information, and advises additional confident use of those sinks.

I'm not going to do anything so... well... dramatic as quit if something isn't on offer, but I'd like to have more data on what my future courses of action should be.

Rycajo
06-18-2015, 04:33 PM
This is the most important point, I think. If people think they'll be rewarded by not spending their resources because they will get more valuable in the future, the economy chokes.

Just wanted to chime in general agreement to this idea. The company does not want to encourage a hoarding mindset with any goods.

Xenavire
06-18-2015, 04:43 PM
This needs to not go live, at all. It's too problematic for the people who have spent gold rolling chests already. This CANNOT be a retroactive change to set 1 & 2 chests. This is something that can only be safely added to set 3 chests. This is completely unfair to anyone who has spent gold rolling chests.

I spent nearly all my gold on rolling chests, and span almost every chest I own, and I don't feel this is unfair. On the contrary, it gives me a legitimate reason to want to roll chests going forwards - before it was just a 'waste' and the only driving factor was the sleeves (which I still don't have complete).

As for being early adopters - this is what early adopters do. Early adopters buy/test something and work out the kinks, then those kinks get fixed and then everyone else jumps and and reaps the benefit. The only time in living memory that I can recall any early adopters getting any kind compensation was from Nintendo (the Ambassador program, which I was a part of) and it wasn't actually required for them to do it. They did anyway, and it was awesome, but the gravity of what was happening is hardly comparable so I don't think HexEnt should compensate us. If they do, great, but it should come with some fine print saying it is a one-off.

selpai
06-18-2015, 04:47 PM
They just shut down a thread discussing this. Do they have Ellen Pao moderating these forums? And yeah, if they apply this retroactively, to set 1 and 2 chests, it will make a HUGE stink. Of course, they might have data saved from every player's chest rolls, and be able to apply dust retroactively instead, but i doubt it.

Zophie
06-18-2015, 04:49 PM
I see the thread title was lost in a thread merge, I liked the original better lol

How Much Dust Have You Blown?

Mejis
06-18-2015, 04:53 PM
I probably have the most to lose, but I'm in the camp that thinks backdating any additional rewards sets an awful precedent. :( You play the game, you take your chances. Every Set/content release changes the value of everything anyway, this is no different. Everything evolves...

I'm in agreement with this.
I've spun a lot of chests for a lot of gold, but don't regret that decision.
I would assume there aren't a huge number of players that have been hoarding chests and not spinning them, so the majority of us are going forward in the same boat.

Anyway, interested to see what decision the devs come to and hear some more info on it.

Kaiba_Graysoul
06-18-2015, 04:53 PM
Just think tho about the added value we got when you won gold for tournies 20,000 a win people that have come later no longer get that might mitigate losses in that sense

purpenflurb
06-18-2015, 04:59 PM
I think that, as has been previously stated, it is important to provide some sort of backwards compensation to discourage market hoarding. Chests have never been concrete content, they have been a promise that bothering with them will be worthwhile. We didn't know what we were getting in the first place rolling them, we still don't entirely.

Punishing those who had enough faith in the game to go for the unknown of chest spins early, and rewarding those who were paranoid and hoarded them to see what they were going to have is an awful precedent, much worse than the precedent of retroactive compensation. If they add more rewards to chest spins without compensation, should I hold onto my packs in case they get more valuable? Should I not open chests in case they get more valuable? Maybe I shouldn't spend money on the game at all because they might decrease pack price. They have to maintain some degree of trust if they want a healthy market.

selpai
06-18-2015, 05:00 PM
Just think tho about the added value we got when you won gold for tournies 20,000 a win people that have come later no longer get that might mitigate losses in that sense
This is literally the opposite scenario. In your example, they've taken value away instead of adding it.

Xenavire
06-18-2015, 05:07 PM
I think that, as has been previously stated, it is important to provide some sort of backwards compensation to discourage market hoarding. Chests have never been concrete content, they have been a promise that bothering with them will be worthwhile. We didn't know what we were getting in the first place rolling them, we still don't entirely.

Punishing those who had enough faith in the game to go for the unknown of chest spins early, and rewarding those who were paranoid and hoarded them to see what they were going to have is an awful precedent, much worse than the precedent of retroactive compensation. If they add more rewards to chest spins without compensation, should I hold onto my packs in case they get more valuable? Should I not open chests in case they get more valuable? Maybe I shouldn't spend money on the game at all because they might decrease pack price. They have to maintain some degree of trust if they want a healthy market.

How is anyone being punished though? Everyone still got the appropriate rewards at the time. And so what if they decide in 10 years time to add more things like primal packs or chests, that add value to packs - should you just stop using packs now in case that happens? Of course not, nor does that mean you miss out of anything in the here and now.

I mean did Wizards compensate people when they started adding Mythics to packs? Of course not, that would be ludicrous.

magic_gazz
06-18-2015, 05:10 PM
How is anyone being punished though? Everyone still got the appropriate rewards at the time. And so what if they decide in 10 years time to add more things like primal packs or chests, that add value to packs - should you just stop using packs now in case that happens? Of course not, nor does that mean you miss out of anything in the here and now.

I mean did Wizards compensate people when they started adding Mythics to packs? Of course not, that would be ludicrous.

They only added mytics to NEW packs though. Not added them to ones people had bought and not opened.

Zophie
06-18-2015, 05:10 PM
I mean did Wizards compensate people when they started adding Mythics to packs? Of course not, that would be ludicrous.

No offense but that's probably not a good analogy, they didn't somehow magically slip mythics into unopened packs of previous sets that people hadn't opened yet. They did it with the start of a new set.

Yoss
06-18-2015, 05:16 PM
Obvious solution (maybe not best) is to have this start with Set 3 chests.

Barkam
06-18-2015, 05:17 PM
Well, definitely just going to hoard gold and not spin chests until all WoF design is finalized.

sukebe
06-18-2015, 05:17 PM
Thank you for repeating this suggestion again. The 8th time was much more convincing.

You are welcome :-) I am sorry for repeating myself but with all this whining about this topic I feel things like this need to be repeated for those just joining the conversation. I never ceases to amaze me how entitled people feel when it comes to video games and how little they want to take responsibility for their own decisions. We were never promised that spin results would not change. I cannot speak for anyone else but I starting spinning chests with the assumption that things would likely change down the road. this is beta after all. I had no way of knowing if changes to the system would be good or bad but I took the plunge and spun almost 1k chests (went ahead and counted them this time instead of just estimating :-) ) and enjoyed it and got the rewards that were available at the time.

Posts like this one that I just replied to are pointless and immature. Even repeating the same thing over again (as you say I am doing) is more useful than that.


There's still a feeling of regret for that loss that we wish at least addressed if not compensated, and a concern over future changes so we have better decision making going forward. I don't think anything about that is unreasonable at all.

again though, why are people so surprised this changed? I have said this before but it bears repeating: they never said anything about WoF spins being set in stone.

Not to mention the fact that people were complaining that gold spin results needed a boost. now we see that they have decided to give us this boost. If people did not expect things to be changed, what was the point of all that earlier complaining that gold rolls were not worthwhile enough?

This is an excellent example of "damned if you do, damned if you don't". Hex responds to complaints and makes the rolls better only to have people complain that they spun the chests before this boost happened.

We do not need to be given "compensation" for this change.

When your favorite candy bar comes out with a new version with your favorite fruit in it (lets say strawberries) do you go to the store and demand you get the strawberries that were not included in your previous candy bars?

When you favorite chip brand puts out a bag that says "now with 20% more chips!" do you go to the store and demand to get those extra chips for every bag you have previously purchased?

When your favorite cereal comes out with a version that now includes a free decoder ring do you write the company and demand a ring for every box you previously bought?

When you bought your first copy of the Lord of the Rings movies only to find out that an extended version was released not long after did you demand that the extra footage be sent to you so you could watch it?

Why would anyone expect "compensation" for any of these things, Hex chest spins included? You got what you were promised. You were never told things would not change in the future, and I assume you felt it was worth buying/doing at the time (otherwise why did you keep doing it?) so nothing is owed to anyone.

Why is it so hard to be happy that things have now become better for people? Why not just be happy that every chest you spin from now on has a chance to give you a dust?

Xenavire
06-18-2015, 05:21 PM
I am aware of that, but its getting harder and harder to come up with relevant analogies that aren't simply ignored.

But rarely does any company give anything retroactively to customers - and I know we all are aware how awesome HexEnt is, but theres a point where it starts to feel like people are taking advantage of their kindness. They habitually give far more than they strictly need to, and while we love them for that, I think this just isn't one of those times it is called for. We got what we payed for at the time. That should be good enough for everyone.

poizonous
06-18-2015, 05:22 PM
this all comes down to surprises hurting people... had this information been known, people would have not spun chests, so really no one can blame the player.

Im not sure there is a solution to this...
Back dating chest spins seems impossible
Awarding stardust at like a 1:7 chests spun ratio seems close to accurate but is it really the best solution?

Can anyone confirm that stardust will actually be inside the chests? Because if there is stardust in the chest I can live without the back dated chest spins

Xenavire
06-18-2015, 05:24 PM
Obvious solution (maybe not best) is to have this start with Set 3 chests.

That just favours the early adopters with no regard to new players. Should new players be discouraged from opening block 1 packs? I don't feel like thats a good idea in the slightest. And I would much rather have the chance of getting stardust moving forward - I couldn't afford to roll everything yet, so I have a few chests waiting.

Malakili
06-18-2015, 05:27 PM
Finally, my sloth pays off.

Fyren
06-18-2015, 05:30 PM
----Stuff----

I'm going to repeat myself because the more eloquent of my explanations was lost in the thread merge.

First, no one is "Demanding Compensation." There are people saying it would be nice; and it would be one way to be fair about this; the other obvious option would be to not have stardust in Set 1/2 chests.

Second, when I buy chips or (especially) movie tickets or whatever, I'm not thinking in terms of value. I'm not tracking their prices nor attempting to collect a playset of Pringles. I don't know the price of a 12-ounce bag of Baked Lays offhand, nor do I consider pretzels to be overpriced bread twists. Because who finds that fun?

In this game, what I enjoy is thinking in terms of value. I love trying to game the system, to get as much as I can with as little as possible, to expand my collection via wins and sales. That is one of the principal things that separates Hex from Hearthstone for me - that there is substantial joy in even the virtual accumulation. That accumulation helped me overcome my previous reticence for PVP, to the point that I've put enough ego on the line to enter major constructed tournaments - because I enjoy collecting and acquiring just that much. It's a substantial part of the fun for me. It tickles me every color of pink that I blew like $120 on this game and I have a collection that just exceeded 100,000 Platinum in value, even though I know there are people who've done even better in that regard.

What's not fun is feeling like you were punished in terms of those resources by something that was the result of neither the RNG, nor a shifting marketplace, nor a shifting metagame. If you get shard screwed, that's RNG at work. If you buy a bunch of Reeses and then suddenly they tank in price in set 3 because he's scragged by a ubiquitous uncommon in Constructed, that's the market at work. This is HexENT about to make a deliberate decision.

Thus, I'm not afraid to admit that the moment the concept of that missing out leaves me mildly sore. By my calculations, if the change goes live as-is, I"ve effectively missed $14.60 or so worth of gold (Gold-plat being back around 100:1 as of late) which is not an entirely insignificant number. If that is something that the Hex devs want and that we should always remain aware is a possibility, then that is useful information, and advises additional caution around offered gold sinks, or at least the Wheel. At the same time, if they wish to offer something to those who did, that is also useful information, and advises additional confident use of those sinks. Which I assume is what Hex wants.

Yoss
06-18-2015, 05:35 PM
again though, why are people so surprised this changed? I have said this before but it bears repeating: they never said anything about WoF spins being set in stone.

Not to mention the fact that people were complaining that gold spin results needed a boost. now we see that they have decided to give us this boost. If people did not expect things to be changed, what was the point of all that earlier complaining that gold rolls were not worthwhile enough?
I would guess they're not upset about change in general. They're upset about change carried out in an "unfair" manner.


This is an excellent example of "damned if you do, damned if you don't". Hex responds to complaints and makes the rolls better only to have people complain that they spun the chests before this boost happened.
This isn't a binary situation (if you do, if you don't). There are other ways to implement the change, like having it only apply to Set 3 and onward.


We do not need to be given "compensation" for this change.

When your favorite candy bar comes out with a new version with your favorite fruit in it (lets say strawberries) do you go to the store and demand you get the strawberries that were not included in your previous candy bars?
Invalid analogy. The added berries constitute an entirely new product, not a strict upgrade.


When you favorite chip brand puts out a bag that says "now with 20% more chips!" do you go to the store and demand to get those extra chips for every bag you have previously purchased?

When your favorite cereal comes out with a version that now includes a free decoder ring do you write the company and demand a ring for every box you previously bought?

When you bought your first copy of the Lord of the Rings movies only to find out that an extended version was released not long after did you demand that the extra footage be sent to you so you could watch it?
Invalid analogies. The previously-purchased-but-not-opened bags would also have to somehow have 20% more chips, not just new purchases. The previously-purchased-but-not-opened cereal would also have to somehow have the ring, not just new purchases. The previously-purchased-but-not-opened movie would also have to somehow have gain the extras, not just new purchases.

The analogies become valid (and I would fully agree) if the Hex situation was that it applies only to Set 3 and onward. Then it would be totally cool.

Yoss
06-18-2015, 05:35 PM
That just favours the early adopters with no regard to new players. Should new players be discouraged from opening block 1 packs? I don't feel like thats a good idea in the slightest. And I would much rather have the chance of getting stardust moving forward - I couldn't afford to roll everything yet, so I have a few chests waiting.

How does it favor early adopters? Everyone (early or otherwise) would get the same rolls.

Yoss
06-18-2015, 05:40 PM
Well, definitely just going to hoard gold and not spin chests until all WoF design is finalized.

This is exactly why the change should only apply to Set 3 and up. A company should NEVER encourage its customers to stop using/buying product. Period. End of talk.

(Sorry for multi-posting. Thread moving too fast.)

Xenavire
06-18-2015, 05:45 PM
How does it favor early adopters? Everyone (early or otherwise) would get the same rolls.

Because a new player has limited resources/time, and I am positive that the standard advice will be to buy the packs that give the most value (and with those dust on offer, most people will say that non-block 1 sets will have the better payout overall.)

Plus this is denying all other players the chance at something nice just to appease early adopters, which seems even less fair than letting every have a shot at dust on block 1 wheels rolls moving forward. I mean, don't we ideally want hundreds of thousands of new players to come in? And have those players opening packs? In theory then, we could see as many block 1 packs opened between now and block 1 rotating as we have seen so far, and those people would all miss out because of a few entitled people in the here and now.

Sparrow
06-18-2015, 05:47 PM
Well, definitely just going to hoard gold and not spin chests until all WoF design is finalized.
With the exception of perhaps the resource system, I don't think there is any aspect of this game that will ever be finalized. Everything will keep evolving. And that's the problem with Hex trying to compensate people with dust. If they do it for this, the argument will be made in the future that they do it every time something changes. They should just draw a line now and say "no" and reserve across the board compensation for real problems.

noragar
06-18-2015, 05:55 PM
Does anyone have the link to the thread that popped up back around the time they removed gold rewards from tournaments. You know, the one where everyone was asking for all the gold they were given be removed from their accounts because it wouldn't be fair that they got gold, but people playing in future tournaments wouldn't.

I searched for it, but couldn't seem to find it.

Barkam
06-18-2015, 05:58 PM
With the exception of perhaps the resource system, I don't think there is any aspect of this game that will ever be finalized. Everything will keep evolving. And that's the problem with Hex trying to compensate people with dust. If they do it for this, the argument will be made in the future that they do it every time something changes. They should just draw a line now and say "no" and reserve across the board compensation for real problems.

This is why you have dusts only proc for set 3+ chests. Cleanest solution and use the same logic for all new feature releases.

Fyren
06-18-2015, 05:59 PM
Does anyone have the link to the thread that popped up back around the time they removed gold rewards from tournaments. You know, the one where everyone was asking for all the gold they were given be removed from their accounts because it wouldn't be fair that they got gold, but people playing in future tournaments wouldn't.

I searched for it, but couldn't seem to find it.

As Yoss was saying: Invalid analogy. They got this information in advance, and when they got this information, there was something they could do about it that wasn't reliant on the decisions of HexENT: They could play a ton of tournaments and pick up a bunch more gold before that source dried up.

There is nothing you can really do about having spun all your chests, even with that information, besides stopping spinning future chests until Set 3 goes live.

Yoss
06-18-2015, 06:01 PM
Because a new player has limited resources/time, and I am positive that the standard advice will be to buy the packs that give the most value (and with those dust on offer, most people will say that non-block 1 sets will have the better payout overall.)

Plus this is denying all other players the chance at something nice just to appease early adopters, which seems even less fair than letting every have a shot at dust on block 1 wheels rolls moving forward. I mean, don't we ideally want hundreds of thousands of new players to come in? And have those players opening packs? In theory then, we could see as many block 1 packs opened between now and block 1 rotating as we have seen so far, and those people would all miss out because of a few entitled people in the here and now.
This makes no sense to me. If they implement only for Set 3 and onward, then the old packs will have exactly the same content they've always had. How is that bad?

People will still want to have Set 1 & 2 stuff, including the WoF stuff. They will still be able to get it at exactly the same odds as everyone else did (so long as it's in print).

Yoss
06-18-2015, 06:02 PM
Does anyone have the link to the thread that popped up back around the time they removed gold rewards from tournaments. You know, the one where everyone was asking for all the gold they were given be removed from their accounts because it wouldn't be fair that they got gold, but people playing in future tournaments wouldn't.

I searched for it, but couldn't seem to find it.

Invalid analogy. Both before and after that change, Every customer got exactly what he paid for and knew what he'd get before the purchase. Not to mention that we all knew from day 1 that the gold for tournaments was a temporary thing that they warned us would go away some day (and it did).

Xenavire
06-18-2015, 06:02 PM
This is why you have dusts only proc for set 3+ chests. Cleanest solution and use the same logic for all new feature releases.

Except it isn't a good solution. Maybe if block 1 was cycling as the feature was changing, but not when those packs will continue to be sold and used.


This makes no sense to me. If they implement only for Set 3 and onward, then the old packs will have exactly the same content they've always had. How is that bad?

People will still want to have Set 1 & 2 stuff, including the WoF stuff. They will still be able to get it at exactly the same odds as everyone else did (so long as it's in print).

Even if everyone would get the same thing, all you are suggesting is that someone else shouldn't get something because you didn't. That is petty and childish.

You and everyone else that rolled knew the odds and rewards at the time. In future those will be different. Does that actually hurt you? No. It just means you can acquire and roll those chests yourselves if you so wish.

Xavon
06-18-2015, 06:03 PM
Normally I would not care if it was retroactively added or not. If chase cards are added to a reprint set, so be it.

But in this case it is different because:
1) The game is still in Beta.
2) The chests can't be opened yet.

That said, as someone who can't get into the Test server, just what is stardust, anyway?

Yoss
06-18-2015, 06:05 PM
Stardust is what unlocks Extended Art. It costs a lot of gold to buy it at the Store.

israel.kendall
06-18-2015, 06:05 PM
Normally I would not care if it was retroactively added or not. If chase cards are added to a reprint set, so be it.

But in this case it is different because:
1) The game is still in Beta.
2) The chests can't be opened yet.

That said, as someone who can't get into the Test server, just what is stardust, anyway?

http://forums.cryptozoic.com/showthread.php?t=43239&page=22&p=487467&viewfull=1#post487467

Xavon
06-18-2015, 06:07 PM
Then it definitely needs to be added retroactively, given the past ummm... discussions about the changes to Extended Art cards.

Yoss
06-18-2015, 06:08 PM
@Xen:
So you're cool with HXE encouraging players to avoid spending resources and time in their game due to the risk of value loss on future changes? Brilliant business strategy.

Every choice by HXE should encourage early adoption, more playing, more paying, or at least be neutral on those topics.

EDIT:

Then it definitely needs to be added retroactively, given the past ummm... discussions about the changes to Extended Art cards.

I do not support retroactive application. That's bad precedent. All changes should apply in a forward-looking manner.

Xenavire
06-18-2015, 06:10 PM
@Xen:
So you're cool with HXE encouraging players to avoid spending resources and time in their game due to the risk of value loss on future changes? Brilliant business strategy.

Every choice by HXE should encourage early adoption, more playing, more paying, or at least be neutral on those topics.

Seriously, at this point the damage is done - people are going to do what they do either way. All you are going to do by limiting chest rolls is encourage people to not invest into older content, which is equally unhealthy for the game.

About the only way HexEnt could avoid this is by making promises they may not be able to keep.

Gorgol
06-18-2015, 06:11 PM
set 3 and on is how it should be.

Xexist
06-18-2015, 06:11 PM
@Xen:
So you're cool with HXE encouraging players to avoid spending resources and time in their game due to the risk of value loss on future changes? Brilliant business strategy.

Every choice by HXE should encourage early adoption, more playing, more paying, or at least be neutral on those topics.

EDIT:


I do not support retroactive application. That's bad precedent. All changes should apply in a forward-looking manner.

Yoss has it right. Shocking I know ;)

Yoss
06-18-2015, 06:13 PM
Seriously, at this point the damage is done - people are going to do what they do either way. All you are going to do by limiting chest rolls is encourage people to not invest into older content, which is equally unhealthy for the game.

About the only way HexEnt could avoid this is by making promises they may not be able to keep.

Again, not making sense. No damage is done. Nothing has gone live. There is maybe a sliver of truth here, that players may decide to spin Set 3+ in preference to spinning Set 1 & 2, but so what? People will still spin Set 1 & 2. Not all gold sinks need to be equal.

Xenavire
06-18-2015, 06:17 PM
Again, not making sense. No damage is done. Nothing has gone live. There is maybe a sliver of truth here, that players may decide to spin Set 3+ in preference to spinning Set 1 & 2, but so what? People will still spin Set 1 & 2. Not all gold sinks need to be equal.

The damage is done because no matter what method they employ, someone will be upset/hurt. Add it to all chests? People who already rolled are upset. Don't add it to set 1+2 chests? Newer players miss out on a cool feature for the sake of a few people whining about fairness. Don't add it at all? Everyone misses out on a cool feature. Do a retroactive compensation? HexEnt slides a little further down the slippery slope.

There is no way for them to really win this one, so they should just go ahead with what they had planned, as it is the healthiest for the game - have a shiny new thing be yet another advertisement for new players.

Yoss
06-18-2015, 06:21 PM
The damage is done because no matter what method they employ, someone will be upset/hurt. Add it to all chests? People who already rolled are upset. Don't add it to set 1+2 chests? Newer players miss out on a cool feature for the sake of a few people whining about fairness. Don't add it at all? Everyone misses out on a cool feature. Do a retroactive compensation? HexEnt slides a little further down the slippery slope.

There is no way for them to really win this one, so they should just go ahead with what they had planned, as it is the healthiest for the game - have a shiny new thing be yet another advertisement for new players.
The bolded assertion is false. Proper wording for that one is "Late comers get exactly the same as early adopters. No one is favored or disfavored."

poizonous
06-18-2015, 06:24 PM
You know im honestly surprised this thread is so active, get back in the test server people and stop arguing =P

Xenavire
06-18-2015, 06:27 PM
The bolded assertion is false. Proper wording for that one is "Late comers get exactly the same as early adopters. No one is favored or disfavored."

Except that won't be the perception of people coming in and you know it. They will question why there is a strange discrepancy between the sets, and the answer will not be satisfying. Not a good way to encourage player retention.

We already have early adopters with lots of advantages, we need more things to encourage people to join the game. And frankly, you lose nothing personally for having it added, so the arguments are ridiculous. I would love this, even if I only have a few handfuls of block 1 chests to roll.

incitfulmonk21
06-18-2015, 06:28 PM
The first time I have felt like the community is really going to far in asking CZE for things. You thought the chests were worth rolling when you did. Stop crying about it. I rolled all my common's 100's of them and realize that was my choice.

Grow up and realize you made a choice now you have to live with the consequences.

Zophie
06-18-2015, 06:28 PM
Yeah best idea I've heard so far is just make it applicable to Set 3 rolls and beyond. I don't see the point of going back and changing how Set 1 and 2 rewards work on the WoF unless they feel like we weren't getting enough, in which case many people that already dumped all their gold into spinning them is gonna have that negative feeling of "crap I wish I would have waited" and that's not a precedent we want to set, is it?

Xexist
06-18-2015, 06:31 PM
The first time I have felt like the community is really going to far in asking CZE for things. You thought the chests were worth rolling when you did. Stop crying about it. I rolled all my common's 100's of them and realize that was my choice.

Grow up and realize you made a choice now you have to live with the consequences.

What kind of brain malfunction is causing people to call other people whiners, criers, etc for simply having a discussion on the topic?

NEWSFLASH: People can have different opinions from you that might not be wrong!

Barkam
06-18-2015, 06:34 PM
What kind of brain malfunction is causing people to call other people whiners, criers, etc for simply having a discussion on the topic?

NEWSFLASH: People can have different opinions from you that might not be wrong!

This is why he is not an insightful monk. *Badum dish*

Zophie
06-18-2015, 06:37 PM
What ... is causing people to call other people whiners, criers, etc for simply having a discussion on the topic?

NEWSFLASH: People can have different opinions from you that might not be wrong!

Seriously, every time one of these divisive issues comes up in these forums there's always one side telling the other side they're whining and crying or calling them trolls or entitled or whatever just because they disagree with their opinions. Doesn't matter what side of an issue you are on, please treat everyone with respect and just focus on discussing your own opinions without being hyperbolic about it or degrading other people's opinions to support your own. It doesn't help the game, it doesn't help our community, and it doesn't further the discussion in any meaningful way.

purpenflurb
06-18-2015, 06:38 PM
This discussion is going quickly, but I think it is also important to note that while I am definitely in favor of retroactive dust rewards, I am well aware that crytozoic doesn't owe us anything. This is a game we are all playing because we want to. And they want us to play their game. And ultimately, if they add dust rewards to all chest rolls, giving some retroactively would help engender good will among the playerbase, which would in turn help the game's longevity.

Fyren
06-18-2015, 06:39 PM
You know im honestly surprised this thread is so active, get back in the test server people and stop arguing =P

But I'm enjoying this, on some perverse level! X3


Seriously, every time one of these divisive issues comes up in these forums there's always one side telling the other side they're whining and crying or calling them trolls or entitled or whatever just because they disagree with their opinions. Doesn't matter what side of an issue you are on, please treat everyone with respect and just focus on discussing your own opinions without being hyperbolic about it or degrading other people's opinions to support your own. It doesn't help the game, it doesn't help our community, and it doesn't further the discussion in any meaningful way.

I cannot quote this harder than it's being quoted right now.

Xexist
06-18-2015, 06:39 PM
What if this was after chests had already been opened and hex had said hey we have added this cool new loot to the loot table for set 1!

Would people still think that was fair?

Xenavire
06-18-2015, 06:42 PM
Seriously, every time one of these divisive issues comes up in these forums there's always one side telling the other side they're whining and crying or calling them trolls or entitled or whatever just because they disagree with their opinions. Doesn't matter what side of an issue you are on, please treat everyone with respect and just focus on discussing your own opinions without being hyperbolic about it or degrading other people's opinions to support your own. It doesn't help the game, it doesn't help our community, and it doesn't further the discussion in any meaningful way.

When the topic is borderline ridiculous (everyone got what they paid for when they paid for it, they are not suddenly owed thousands for doing nothing) and everyone on the side complaining ignores the calm, rational explanation, the only option is to get a little hyperbolic and hope they notice.

If this wasn't entirely unreasonable, I don't think there would be much argument.

Gwaer
06-18-2015, 06:43 PM
I definitely think it should apply to all chests. Not just 3+ whether they backdate them or not.

incitfulmonk21
06-18-2015, 06:45 PM
Had the approach been, and for those that took the approach, Hey here is how I think it would have been better if.... Then those people are having a discussion and my comment was not directed at them. However, those that have the attitude of wow this sucks I could have gotten more even though I was perfectly happy before That attitude is whining.

Noticed how my post was separated the first part directed at the conversation the last part directed at the whining.

I have no problem with disagreement and discussion I have a problem with saying whaaaa I want more even though I was perfectly content before.

I understand people are upset there is an adult way and a childish way to handle it. Discussion = Adult. Life's not fair = child.

Zophie
06-18-2015, 06:48 PM
When the topic is borderline ridiculous (everyone got what they paid for when they paid for it, they are not suddenly owed thousands for doing nothing) and everyone on the side complaining ignores the calm, rational explanation, the only option is to get a little hyperbolic and hope they notice.

If this wasn't entirely unreasonable, I don't think there would be much argument.

This is what I'm talking about, calling other people's concerns ridiculous because you disagree with them, and acting like their opinion doesn't matter, and further more saying that they're ignoring your "calm, rational explanation" while simultaneously ignoring theirs.

Honestly I think both sides have made decent points, but frankly I'm more inclined to support whichever side can respect everyone else more. So far Gwaer is winning.

Gwaer
06-18-2015, 06:54 PM
Hey, it's clear this stardust concept wasn't fully fleshed out, or perhaps didn't exist at all the first time someone rolled a chest. Adding stardust to chest roll payouts is fantastic. It's a universally good move.

There are perfectly decent and reasonable arguments on both sides, I personally think HXE will probably try to find some fair way to compensate people who have rolled chests, but they may not have the data going all the way back to that very first chest roll to be able to fairly compensate everyone per roll. If it's just impossible to fairly compensate people for this, then you'll just have to write it off as a loss, if they can I'm sure they'll come up with something.

I always win in your heart Zophie, and that's what is truly important to me.

Xenavire
06-18-2015, 06:54 PM
This is what I'm talking about, calling other people's concerns ridiculous because you disagree with them, and acting like their opinion doesn't matter, and further more saying that they're ignoring your "calm, rational explanation" while simultaneously ignoring theirs.

Honestly I think both sides have made decent points, but frankly I'm more inclined to support whichever side can respect everyone else more. So far Gwaer is winning.

I was perfectly willing to respect the complaint until it became a full fledged whine-fest. Again, no-one has lost anything. Everyone stands to potentially gain from the change. This is all positive. Not negative.

And for the record, I have a decent sized stake here because a refund would benefit me. I still don't want it. I would technically also 'benefit' from block 1 being exempt from stardust rolls. I don't want that either. I like the implementation as it stands on the test server, regardless of what 'loss of value' that means to me.

Xavon
06-18-2015, 06:55 PM
You thought the chests were worth rolling when you did.

No, I didn't. I did it because I was helping to test part of the game, and I gritted my teeth every time. Which is also why I have only rolled common chests, and haven't even rolled all of those. And if we could have opened the chests, and this wasn't beta, I wouldn't even be arguing this.


You know im honestly surprised this thread is so active, get back in the test server people and stop arguing =P

If I could get on the test server, I certainly wouldn't be reading this.

Fyren
06-18-2015, 06:57 PM
When the topic is borderline ridiculous (everyone got what they paid for when they paid for it, they are not suddenly owed thousands for doing nothing) and everyone on the side complaining ignores the calm, rational explanation, the only option is to get a little hyperbolic and hope they notice.

Not everyone has had the opportunity to read the entire thread! Calmly repeating your argument is fine and justified in long threads. You're not being 'deliberately ignored.' The hyperbole doesn't help your case; at best you get a few joining jeers from yes-men that don't contribute to the debate, at worst you... Well, you know how it is, you spend three pages arguing with me about a word choice and 'anecdotal evidence.' :p In neither case do you win converts.

The suggestion that this argument is 'ridiculous' is further hyperbole. The most ridiculous thing about any of this is only that we're still having the argument as though it mattered; Hex is aware of the issue, has said that they're aware of the issue, and they'll deal with it as the feel appropriate. At no point in this thread(that I'm aware)has anyone come in and flat out said they're entitled to things; there's an entirely valid question regarding how they intend to handle these changes, how often and how lightly they're likely to make them, the value propositions involved in chest spinning, and other forms of resource optimization. For some of us, it's minutiae (although it's $80 of minutiae in a few cases) but we're interested in all aspects of this game. We're geeks. We love the minutiae, and for some of us the gains, gold and the AH are as much a part of the game as Quick Actions and Threshholds.

Selanius
06-18-2015, 07:00 PM
If HEX added a new Legendary to Set 1 Boosters would you be ok with that?

Sparrow
06-18-2015, 07:01 PM
This is why you have dusts only proc for set 3+ chests. Cleanest solution and use the same logic for all new feature releases.
No argument with that solution, I guess, if that's what it takes to keep the peace. Though, I'd be fine if it was for all chests.

Xenavire
06-18-2015, 07:04 PM
Fyren, I have to disagree, the truth is not hyperbole, and this is definitely ridiculous. The fact that HexEnt didn't have anything planned heavily implies they didn't even suspect people would object to this cool new thing. There has been zero value lost, only value that can be gained. Asking for compensation is as strange to me as people thinking they can report a bugged draft, win it, and expect a refund to boot.

Zophie
06-18-2015, 07:04 PM
I always win in your heart Zophie, and that's what is truly important to me.

So true :o

http://i.imgur.com/3F12MfD.gif

awkward hug time!

selpai
06-18-2015, 07:10 PM
Except that won't be the perception of people coming in and you know it.

No, i really don't. And that's hardly a concern right now. A friendly disclaimer somewhere, stating that dust can be obtained from set 3 chests and above would go a long way too.

poizonous
06-18-2015, 07:11 PM
Fyren, I have to disagree, the truth is not hyperbole, and this is definitely ridiculous. The fact that HexEnt didn't have anything planned heavily implies they didn't even suspect people would object to this cool new thing. There has been zero value lost, only value that can be gained. Asking for compensation is as strange to me as people thinking they can report a bugged draft, win it, and expect a refund to boot.

Xena, is it possible for you to see outside of your tunnel vision?? Stop saying this topic is ridiculous. You are claiming you are speaking truth when nothing you have said is anything more than an opinion

x78089
06-18-2015, 07:14 PM
Xena, is it possible for you to see outside of your tunnel vision?? Stop saying this topic is ridiculous. You are claiming you are speaking truth when nothing you have said is anything more than an opinion

Very rarely do poizonous and I agree, but on this I have to side with him. Asking for compensation to be considered is not at all ridiculous. Rage quitting over no compensation would be ridiculous. Xen, you are way off base on this topic. Your view of whether compensation is not out there, but your desire to suit down the opposing view is as you say ridiculous.

Gwaer
06-18-2015, 07:15 PM
I don't like limiting dust to set 3+ For a couple of reasons. If this stardust mechanic was fleshed out from the start it would be on all chests, it's not tied to set 3 in any way other than that's when it was done, there are a ton of set 1+2 chests that have yet to be rolled, making them exempt from getting stardust markedly increases the rarity of stardust, which increases the difficulty of obtaining extended arts, which as I said in my super long EA thread, extended arts should be the lowest possible card modification, the easiest and cheapest to obtain, because it's the simplest in terms of assets to acquire, no full art is shown on any card, it takes no further development time once the tech to show an EA is finished. So for a healthy number to enter the economy quickly I think they should come from all sets, I don't think it should be a problem if they aren't given retroactively, that may be too many entering the market too soon for their liking which is totally acceptable. But moving forward all chests should have the chance of dropping them.

Xexist
06-18-2015, 07:16 PM
When the topic is borderline ridiculous (everyone got what they paid for when they paid for it, they are not suddenly owed thousands for doing nothing) and everyone on the side complaining ignores the calm, rational explanation, the only option is to get a little hyperbolic and hope they notice.

If this wasn't entirely unreasonable, I don't think there would be much argument.

Noone claimed they were owed anything, noone has demanded anything, and its not so ridiculous that HEX isn't discussing it.

Xenavire
06-18-2015, 07:17 PM
Xena, is it possible for you to see outside of your tunnel vision?? Stop saying this topic is ridiculous. You are claiming you are speaking truth when nothing you have said is anything more than an opinion

When there is a long-standing pattern of only caring about value and never about fun, I can safely say this isn't tunnel vision, just disgust. This didn't need to be added, it was a nice perk. And it has been defecated on liberally rather than being embraced, just like so many other nice things that have been done for us.

And unless all of that is a figment of my imagination, I am going to stand by what I have said.

Fyren
06-18-2015, 07:18 PM
Fyren, I have to disagree, the truth is not hyperbole, and this is definitely ridiculous. The fact that HexEnt didn't have anything planned heavily implies they didn't even suspect people would object to this cool new thing. There has been zero value lost, only value that can be gained. Asking for compensation is as strange to me as people thinking they can report a bugged draft, win it, and expect a refund to boot.

The more secure truth is that calling the opposing side's argument 'ridiculous' rather than actually trying to take it apart is unhelpful and unconstructive. We're better than this. Hex is better than this, and that's just as much a reason I'm here as the value games, if not more.

First, seeing stuff like this is what the test server is for, just as much as picking bugs out of the Coyotle fur in which they appear to have taken up residence. They can't think of everything, they've got enough to think about as it is. That they didn't have anything planned "Implies" to me about as much as the fact that Wakuna Crowfeather fails to apply its buffs to Coyotle "Implies" that that was an intended balance change.

Second, again, you're treating this as a hardline objection, or like we're saying the sky will fall if no compensation is offered, or any of that. We want to know whether this is intended, what the case is, and how they intend to handle it. It was an entirely valid question regarding a lost potential value proposition, and we want to know whether or not this is Hex's intent, or what Hex's intent is going forward. That's all.

I have completely failed to see what's unreasonable about asking HexEnt for this information.

Gwaer
06-18-2015, 07:21 PM
When there is a long-standing pattern of only caring about value and never about fun, I can safely say this isn't tunnel vision, just disgust. This didn't need to be added, it was a nice perk. And it has been defecated on liberally rather than being embraced, just like so many other nice things that have been done for us.

And unless all of that is a figment of my imagination, I am going to stand by what I have said.

You are the worst in any topic like this, there is healthy discussion coming from both sides, and then there is you driving controversy. Just stop. It has happened time and again, and I just hope, for all our sakes you begin to recognize this preventable pattern that you perpetuate. Reading through this thread, you were the most aggressive, you were the one using trolling tactics to drive it off topic, you were negative, you baited others, and you continue to do so. A dev responded that they're discussing this internally, they felt it was warranted enough to have a discussion about it, the only person pooping on anything in this thread is you. Please stop. Please.

Selanius
06-18-2015, 07:22 PM
Xenavire? If they added a new Legendary to Set 1 Packs would you be ok with it? Why or Why not?

Zophie
06-18-2015, 07:22 PM
I don't like limiting dust to set 3+ For a couple of reasons. If this stardust mechanic was fleshed out from the start it would be on all chests, it's not tied to set 3 in any way other than that's when it was done, there are a ton of set 1+2 chests that have yet to be rolled, making them exempt from getting stardust markedly increases the rarity of stardust, which increases the difficulty of obtaining extended arts, which as I said in my super long EA thread, extended arts should be the lowest possible card modification, the easiest and cheapest to obtain, because it's the simplest in terms of assets to acquire, no full art is shown on any card, it takes no further development time once the tech to show an EA is finished. So for a healthy number to enter the economy quickly I think they should come from all sets, I don't think it should be a problem if they aren't given retroactively, that may be too many entering the market too soon for their liking which is totally acceptable. But moving forward all chests should have the chance of dropping them.

Yeah I completely agree with the concerns about EAs being too difficult/expensive to obtain which is why I think the issue of missing opportunities to earn stardust is important to a lot of people here. Like you said though it'll all come down to what HXE's stance is on how quickly they want to push these into the economy. Personally I'd love if all my chest rolling suddenly paid off by putting a big dent in my progress towards unlocking all my EAs, but I'll trust HXE to make the decision they feel is best for the game and that'll be alright by me.

Fyren
06-18-2015, 07:22 PM
When there is a long-standing pattern of only caring about value and never about fun, I can safely say this isn't tunnel vision, just disgust. This didn't need to be added, it was a nice perk. And it has been defecated on liberally rather than being embraced, just like so many other nice things that have been done for us.

And unless all of that is a figment of my imagination, I am going to stand by what I have said.

It is a figment of your imagination, in at least 2 ways:

1) This is much more of a raised eyebrow than a defecation. Please stop with the hyperbole, it helps nothing.

2) You seem to believe that value games are unenjoyable. They might be for you. I, personally, >Love< value games. I get all kinds of fuzzy out of making packs into more packs and more plat with wins and AH sales. I want to know all the rules of the value games because I'm passionate about those. I quit Hearthstone just as much because you couldn't trade or build value like that just as much as the casual simplicity, if not more. I desire information.

That is not unreasonable.

Xexist
06-18-2015, 07:26 PM
The more secure truth is that calling the opposing side's argument 'ridiculous' rather than actually trying to take it apart is unhelpful and unconstructive. We're better than this. Hex is better than this, and that's just as much a reason I'm here as the value games, if not more.

First, seeing stuff like this is what the test server is for, just as much as picking bugs out of the Coyotle fur in which they appear to have taken up residence. They can't think of everything, they've got enough to think about as it is. That they didn't have anything planned "Implies" to me about as much as the fact that Wakuna Crowfeather fails to apply its buffs to Coyotle "Implies" that that was an intended balance change.

Second, again, you're treating this as a hardline objection, or like we're saying the sky will fall if no compensation is offered, or any of that. We want to know whether this is intended, what the case is, and how they intend to handle it. It was an entirely valid question regarding a lost potential value proposition, and we want to know whether or not this is Hex's intent, or what Hex's intent is going forward. That's all.

I have completely failed to see what's unreasonable about asking HexEnt for this information.

Lets say I go out and buy something at the store. They very next day said item is sold and includes bonus item X.
He is acting as if it is unreasonable or disgusting to ask if I can retroactively get the item due to my former purchase. I was raised by my mother, a frugal money saving woman, that it never hurts to ask.

Asking has got me all kinds of discounts on all kinds of things, and as much as I LOVE Hex, I like my money in my pocket better than I like my money in their pocket. They quite often convince me to part with some of it though :D

Anyways.. if they say it will no be retroactive, then that is that. It is their business and their choice and I wont lose any sleep over it, but I find it a little offensive that Xen preaches down from his pedestal how disgusting we all are, those of us who want to make the most of our money.

Xenavire
06-18-2015, 07:28 PM
You are the worst in any topic like this, there is healthy discussion coming from both sides, and then there is you driving controversy. Just stop. It has happened time and again, and I just hope, for all our sakes you begin to recognize this preventable pattern that you perpetuate. Reading through this thread, you were the most aggressive, you were the one using trolling tactics to drive it off topic, you were negative, you baited others, and you continue to do so. A dev responded that they're discussing this internally, they felt it was warranted enough to have a discussion about it, the only person pooping on anything in this thread is you. Please stop. Please.


It is a figment of your imagination, in at least 2 ways:

1) This is much more of a raised eyebrow than a defecation. Please stop with the hyperbole, it helps nothing.

2) You seem to believe that value games are unenjoyable. They might be for you. I, personally, >Love< value games. I get all kinds of fuzzy out of making packs into more packs and more plat with wins and AH sales. I want to know all the rules of the value games because I'm passionate about those. I quit Hearthstone just as much because you couldn't trade or build value like that just as much as the casual simplicity, if not more. I desire information.

That is not unreasonable.

I am just going to say that things behind the scenes (not related to my title, so don't consider that a factor) got me good and riled up about this topic. And in that sense I do feel there has been some defecating going on, just not in public.

But seriously, can we ever get any nice thing without a kneejerk reaction of 'I hate this' or 'Give me stuff'? I honestly can't remember the last time we had a nice thread like that, barring spoiler threads.

poizonous
06-18-2015, 07:32 PM
When there is a long-standing pattern of only caring about value and never about fun, I can safely say this isn't tunnel vision, just disgust. This didn't need to be added, it was a nice perk. And it has been defecated on liberally rather than being embraced, just like so many other nice things that have been done for us.

And unless all of that is a figment of my imagination, I am going to stand by what I have said.

This is a TCG, VALUE is a huge part of the game for most people, even more so than the fun aspect

Phenteo
06-18-2015, 07:33 PM
Update: http://forums.cryptozoic.com/showthread.php?t=43761&p=497526#post497526

Closing this thread.